Twelve Navy Department civilians left home for work last Monday, and never returned, slaughtered by a barrage of gun-fire, at the hands of a former Navy member, hired as a contract employee, despite an apparent record of past "misconduct," anger-management issues, reportedly a penchant for violent video games, claims of "hearing voices," sleep-deprivation, and said to have been under at least some VA care. Among the obvious questions: the inter-agency communication-failures that maintained his access-status, and how he came to possess guns, brought-in and perhaps obtained inside a military facility considered-secure. Raising again the basic issue of force-protection vs. efficient daily-entry for hundreds, sometimes thousands, of properly-ID'd employees. Is it time, then, to re-think non-MP installation gun-restrictions, to be replaced, instead, by selected, highly-trained and armed, rapid-response military-members, serving throughout an installation's units. At both Fort Hood and the Navy Yard, a more timely counter-fire reaction would likely have reduced the loss of life.
Gun-control advocates quickly re-emerged, when news organizations reported that an AR-15 had been used. But they and their media buddies lost interest, once determined it hadn't, and the assailant wasn't a Southern conservative. While those deaths last Monday were incredibly tragic, in Chicago, like D.C., a strict gun-control city, an average of 10 people are murdered weekly. Yet, for that carnage, the media drums don't beat, proving again, that the real concern is largely-synthetic, and political in nature, attempting to infringe, yet another American freedom, by applying a band-aid, not a cure. A valid cliché states: guns don't kill people, people do. Therein lies the problem, and the tough-solution we'll continue to ignore: the instability of the few.
Reported to have been consumed for perhaps hours at a time with violent video games, say friends, and reportedly under VA-mental-health care for the last few months, in shades of Fort Hood, one wonders why no concerned associates had previously stepped forward or, if they did, why no preventative action was taken,